Southern Political Science Association

Constructing Citizens
Author(s): Kevin Olson
Source: The Journal of Politics, Vol. 70, No. 1 (Jan., 2008), pp. 40-53
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Southern Political Science Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30218859 .
Accessed: 08/09/2014 19:30
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and Southern Political Science Association are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Citizens
Constructing
Kevin
OlsonUniversity
ofCalifornia,
Irvine
a disputeoverthesensesin whichcitizensare "constructed."
The liberal-democratic
view
Thisessayarbitrates
theorizes
as a legalstatusguaranteeing
It thereby
theextent
towhichconceptions
citizenship
politicalequality.
ignores
are variablesocialconstructs.
Thegovernmental
viewinsightfully
characterizes
thesocialorigins
ofcitizenship
of
variousconceptions
butfailstoaccount
ofcitizenship,
forcitizens'uniquecapacities
forcollective
self-government.
Actof1964as an example,
I tryto overcome
thesesymmetrical
UsingtheEconomic
Opportunity
shortcomings
by
how
can
have
citizens
abilities
to
construct
the
bases
showing
reflexive
very
oftheirownagencyas citizens.

the

ofcitizenship
in themas such. I will characterize
this double-sided
conception
predominant

democraciesis a liberal-democontemporary
craticone.In thisview,citizenship
is a society's
of
the
democratic
legal recognition
equalityof its
members.A citizen,correspondingly,
is an autonomous subjectentitledto exercisecertainrightsand
certainobligations.
In recentyears,
expectedto fulfill
more
however,thispicturehas grownincreasingly
subtleandcomplex."Governmental"
with
approaches
a Foucauldianorientation
claimthatcitizenship
is not
status
a
politicalrightsand
simply legal
conferring
that
but
one
shapesidentities
obligations,
additionally
and formsof subjectivity.
Here citizenship
not only
but
certifies
more
politicalmembership,
profoundly
and of
servesas a means of social differentiation
interests,
opinions,and preferences.
fabricating
setofquesTheseinsights
open up an important
tions about citizenship's
meaningand significance.
Shouldweviewitas a legalandconceptual
cornerstone
one thatensuresthe political
of liberaldemocracy,
agencyand equalityof all members,or as a created
I will
formsof subjectivity?
thatconstitutes
category
between
these
two
that
we
need
not
choose
argue
ratherstylized
ideas.Instead,theirjuxtaposition
proaboutcitizenship.
videsgroundsforfreshthinking
Actof 1964furnishes
TheEconomicOpportunity
this project.The
for
an instructive
startingpoint
War on
of theJohnsonAdministration's
centerpiece
it
established
community
proantipoverty
Poverty,
gramsaroundtheslogan"maximumfeasibleparticipation." This standardpromotedautonomyand
as goals of government
self-determination
policy.It
to
with
thusconstructed
subjects
capabilities struggle
over and modifythe verypoliciesthatconstructed
TheJournalofPolitics,Vol. 70, No. 1, January
2008,Pp. 40-53
@ 2008 SouthernPoliticalScienceAssociation

selfregimeof citizenshipas a formof "reflexive

is
It
because
it
government." reflexive
givessubjects
limitedabilitiesto construct
the verybases of their
own agencyas citizens.I willclaimthatthisaccount
providesa morecomplex,multidimensional
picture
ofcitizenship,
showinghowit can be simultaneously
createdand creative.
It highlights
theintertwined
and
in
which
senses
citizens
can
be
both
conshifting
and democratically
structed
self-governing.

Two Notionsof Citizenship

In its classicalform,the liberal-democratic
view of
wasbuiltaroundtheideaofnaturally
free,
citizenship
and
citizens.
In
this
view,
equal,
sovereign
democracy
providesa forumin whichcitizensmeet freelyas
about issuesof common
equals to createagreement
concern. Freedom,equality,and sovereignty
are
is theircivilrecognition.
naturaltraitsand citizenship
Eventhe strictest
adherents
of thisviewrealized
thatthingswerenot so simple,however.Lockeand
wereeachawarethattheirpolitical
Kant,forinstance,
views were premisedon particularconceptionsof
naturalhumancapacities(Kant [1797] 1996,150-1,
6:386-7,6:444-7;Locke[1690] 1988,chap.
194-7/AA
6, 15), and thatpeopleoftenfailedto liveup to such
idealizeddemands(Kant [1785] 1996,74-5/AA423;
Locke [1700] 1975,bk. 4, chap. 12, sec. 11). This
for
was responsible
tensionbetweennormand reality
ofwomen,wageearners,
and
theirfamousdismissals
colonial subjectsas politicalagents (Kant [1763]
2003, 76-96, 110-4; [1797] 1996,91-2/AA6:314-5;
doi:10.1017/S0022381607080036
ISSN 0022-3816

40

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONSTRUCTING CITIZENS

41

[1800] 1974, 166-173/AA303-311; Locke [1692]

1963,225; cf. Eze 1995; Mills 1997, 14-19, 67-72;
Parekh 1995). Locke and Kant tendedto see the
ofsuchcapacitiesas a moralimperative
development
chalratherthana contextual,
cultural,or historical
lenge.Failureto developthemwasthusa signofmoral
thancircumstance.
failurerather
havemoved
andcommunitarians
Civicrepublicans
theselapses.Theyseethequalitiesofcitizens
to correct
fostered.
Rousas variabletraitsthatmustbe carefully
believedthatthesetraitsarecorrupseau,forinstance,
and requirecarefulguidancefor
ted by civilization
theirproperdevelopment
(Rousseau1762). Alasdair
ofmodernity,
focusechoesthisindictment
MacIntyre
towards
moral
tendencies
on
its
"Weberian"
fraging
In response,
he draws
mentation
and socialdissensus.
of
on Aristotelian
to describesocialpractices
insights
neededto forgea newmoralconsencommunication
idea ofan
sus.Prominent
amongtheseareAristotle's
ethicofself-cultivation
excellence,
personal
promoting
hisnotionthatsuchexcellence
is closely
boundup with
thepractice
ofbeinga goodcitizen,
andhisdescription
for
ofthedeliberative
needed
powers
politicalcitizen2000,bks. 1-3,6; MacIntyre
1981).
ship(Aristotle
A developmental
strandof liberalism,
stretching
fromWollstonecraft
to Humboldt,Mill,Hobhouse,
and T. H. Marshall,continuesthesethemesas an
It has produceda syninternal
critiqueofliberalism.
in outthesisthatis distinctively
liberal-democratic
and
look,but importantly
shapedbycommunitarian
ideas.Thissynthesis
focusesaboveall
civicrepublican
and associational
on thesocial,institutional,
basesof
a
fundamental
tension
between
citizenship,
identifying
theabstract
idealofcitizens'equalityand thematerial
and difference.
To resolve
realitiesoftheirinequality
thistension,developmental
liberalshavearticulated
a
fuller
senseoftherelationbetweencitizenand society,
describingways societycould promotethe equal
ofitsmembers.
ForWollstonecraft
thisrecitizenship
volvesaroundequal education(1792),forHumboldt
ofstate(1854),forMilla combination
liberty
negative
self-reliance
([1846-47] 1963;[1859]1989)
supported
and"thegospelofleisure"
([1850] 1984),forHobhouse
([1911] 1994) and Marshall([1949] 1963) modern
socialpolicy.
liberalshaveproducedcompelling
Contemporary
versionsofthedevelopmental
viewas well.It playsa
of thediscurkeyrolein neo-Kantianspecifications
and
materialcapabilitiesneeded for
sive, rational,
publicreason(Habermas1996,118-131;Rawls1996,
47-88) and in Will Kymlicka'sargumentthat an
"intactsocietalculture"is necessary
forthefulldevelopmentof liberalcitizens(Kymlicka1995, 84-94).

the normative
This viewalso furnishes
background
of
studies
for contemporary
politicalinempirical
equality,most notablythoseof SidneyVerba (e.g.,
Verba,Schlozman,and Brady1995).All ofthiswork
a broadconsensusthattheequal agencyof
represents
achievement
rather
orchestrated
citizensis a carefully
thana foregone
conclusion.
in thedevelThereis stillan implicitnaturalism
Ittakesas itsgoalthefulland
opmentalview,however.
of
Evenwhile
citizens'
capabilities.
equal development
denyingthe possibilityof a fixedor determinate
treatssuchcapahumannature,thisviewimplicitly
characbilitiesas universal
butunequallydistributed
teristics.
It thereby
themoreradical
failsto recognize
that
the
idea
of
the
democratic
citizen,
possibility
along
withitscharacteristic
be
capabilities,
may an invention
of particularsocial systemsand particularwaysof
individualsfromone another.The
differentiating
viewinsightfully
thesenses
thematizes
developmental
inwhichcitizens
mustbecomecitizens,
butitdoesnot
theconstruction
takethefurther
stepofinvestigating
ofourveryideasaboutcitizenship.
It doesnotidentify
the variablesensesin whichcitizenshipconsistsof
and culturally
historically
specificformsof political
humancapacities,and
agency,participatory
activity,
and relations,
socialattitudes
nordoes itexaminethe
cultural,
social,andpoliticalprocessesthat
underlying
lead us to valorizeparticular
formsofpoliticalmemat
times.
bership particular
Whatis missing,in otherwords,is an historical,
and comparative
examination
ofour
epistemological,
that are
shiftingideas about the characteristics
"natural"or "necessary"forcitizens.Such a study
wouldexaminenotonlythedevelopment
ofindividual peopleas citizens,
butmorebroadly,
thepractices
and conceptualframeworks
thatmold our thinking
about citizenshipitself.It would thus be able to
someof theunderlying
sourcesof our ideas
identify
about politics,includingthe conceptuallimitations
and powerrelationsthatcan findtheirwayintoour
mostimportant
ofthought.
categories
MichelFoucault'slectureson "governmentality"
in thelate1970sprovideconceptualtoolsforsuchan
to "mentality"in this neoanalysis.His reference
logism emphasizesits epistemologicaldimensions
and distancefromtraditional
notionsofgovernment.
AlthoughFoucaultneverbroughtthisworkto press,
itsexistence
as archivedtaperecordings
has givenrise
to a richliterature.
After
manyyearsoflimitedaccess,
the originallectureshave recently
been transcribed
and publishedas well(Foucault2004a,2004b).
The governmental
examinesthe role
perspective
that practicesof interactionand self-modification

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KEVIN OLSON

42

ofthis of politicalthoughttakeon a socializingforcewhen

individualselves.Government
playin forming
kind worksby encouragingpeople to modifyand theyare translated
into specificgovernmental
protheir
own
lives.
It
elicits
activities
For
variousformsof educationand
manage
particular
grams. instance,
fromthem,inculcatingnorms,habits,and durable social pressureare broughtto bear to createdemoin theprocess.Foucaultcoinedtheterm craticcitizens.Coursesin civicsare oftenmandated
dispositions
forsuch processesof subjectfor- parts of the public school curriculum.Similarly,
"subjectification"
mation. Subjectification
createssubjectsprimarily "Rock the Vote" campaignsby media outletslike
active
Political MTV canbe seenas efforts
to shapetheidentities
ofa
throughvoluntary,
self-government.
for instance,is oftenportrayedas a
act
participation,
segmentofthepopulationthatdoes nottypically
civicdutyand an individualresponsibility.
Politicsis or view itselfas citizens-in this case, teenagers.
thus given an ethical dimensionthat encourages Government
producesnewkindsof citizensin such
fromthem.Citizensof
people to act like and thus become citizens(Rose instancesby elicitingactivity
in
the
this
sort
are
who
have
the insights,
1999, 133, 176-184). By engaging
practices
people
preferofengagedpoliticalactors.They
expectedof citizens,people acquirethe habitsand ences,and activities
as competent,
and
empowered,
dispositionsof citizensand in a very real sense mustsee themselves
with
think
of
others.
When
themselves
becomesuch.
equal
people
and interests,
of subjectsand in thiswayand acton suchobligations
In theirfocuson the formation
view
of
other
an
activist
democratic
identities,studies of governmentality
join
theyadopt egalitarian,
as
the
social
and
and
remake
themselves
the
kind of
strandsof socialsciencethatexamine
citizenship
bases of socialization(cf. Habermas personwho fitsit.
interpersonal
to revitalize
thepublicsphere
Thinkers
concerned
Mead
1934,135-226).Bothdescribetheinter1992;
thecapabilities
ofcitizensandactivity
and groupnorms bypromoting
connected
waysthatsocialpractices
civic
and
their
own
behavior
and
the
to
communitarians,
republicans,
including
encouragepeople change
liberals
instruabove-are
work
on
At
the
same
time,
surveyed
governmentalitydevelopmental
identity.
thekindofethicaldimensionthat
also sharesconcernswith comparativestudiesof mentalin creating
and civilsociety(cf.Esping- elicitsactionfromcitizens.Theirclaimsabout the
associations,
institutions,
and the means of
of civic engagement
Andersen1990,1999;Janoski1998;Rose and Miller desirability
inpoliticalethics.
itfunction
as a lesson-book
formsthatgovern- fostering
1992).Bothfocuson thedistinct
and
of
Here
civic
menttakesas it is practicedbyparticular
communitarianism,
republicanism,
regimes
liberalismare not simplyacademic
em- developmental
associations,
families,
states,markets,
voluntary
of
but politicalideologieswithreal
schools
social
networks.
and
informal
thought,
ployers,
for
What sets the governmental
perspectiveapart significance inculcatingidentitiesand practices
fromtheseallieddisciplinesis its abilityto connect (Dean 1999,chap. 6, 8; Dean 2002; Donzelot 1984;
broaderformsofthoughtand practiceto theireffects Rose 1999,167-96;Valverde1996).
on individualsubjects(Lemke 2001, 191; Lemke
By connectingformsof thoughtand practice
kindsofcitizens,
the
ofspecific
withtheconstruction
2002). One of Foucault'sprimaryinnovationsis a
criand governmental
theoreticalperspectivecombininggovernment
providesan insightful
perspective
It
the
extent
to
of
liberal
connections
It
the
mid-level
identifies
democracy. highlights
tique
"mentality."
is
a
malleable
and
which
democratic
and
of
forms
betweenbroader
citizenship
identity
thought practice
actionsandcircumstances
thatshapeiden- category
thespecific
producedby particular
regimesof thought
strand
tities(O'Malley,Weir,and Shearing1997,504-505). and practice.In thissense,thedevelopmental
Governmental
waysof of liberal democracyappears as a programfor
analysisthuslocatesparticular
under- creatingspecifickinds of people accordingto a
within
the
mentalities
identity
constructing
lyingvariouspoliticalprograms(Dean 1999,chap. broaderconceptualblueprint.Politicalcapabilities,
the motivationto be in6-8; Dean 2002; Ewald 1986;Hindess1991;Hindess well-ordered
preferences,
and
and
formed
Valverde
social
reform
1997; O'Malley2000;
1996),
participate, theothertraitsnecessary
are producedaccordingto
movements
(Valverde1991;Walters1994),and forms forpopularsovereignty
ofpoliticalequalof expertise
(Osborne1998,73-87; Rose 1999,87-9, broaderideasaboutthedesirability
When
a
and
full
147-56).
person
adoptsthese
participation.
ity
kind
of
citizen
the
traits
she
becomes
shedsnewlighton
The governmental
specifiedby
perspective
the creationof democraticcitizens.It shows how liberaldemocracy.
idenThegovernmental
perspective
of
such
ideas
and
traces
tifies
the
constructed
nature
to
about
different
of
politicshelp
ways
thinking
itself.The resultis an
producespecifickindsof people. Abstractschemes the processof construction

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONSTRUCTING CITIZENS

43

ofthereladelineation
sophisticated
epistemologically
MaximumFeasibleParticipation
tionsbetweenformsof liberal-democratic
thought,
and identity.
practice,
A moreadequateviewof citizenship
wouldtracethe
view revealsdimenAlthoughthe governmental
withoutlosingsight
waysthatcitizensareconstructed
sionsof citizenship
not seen fromthe liberal-demoof theimportant
sensesin whichdemocratic
citizenit has shortcomings
ofitsown.The
craticperspective,
is a
formofself-government.
It wouldbe
of liberaldemocracy
are missingfrom ship unique
verystrengths
ableto accountforcitizens'politicalactionwhilenot
thispicture.Theseareliberaldemocracy's
valorization
as citizensforgranted.
To tellthe
takingtheiridentity
as a distinctive
of collectiveself-government
practice
of democraticcitizenship
in anykind of adewithadvantages
notsharedby otherformsofcitizen- story
we
must
find
a
to
moments
way integrate
focusesso intently quateway,
perspective
ship.The governmental
of governmental
constructionand collectiveselfof citizensthatit remainslargely
on theconstruction
determination
intoone account.
silentabout the sensesin whichcitizenscan collecThe Economic Opportunity
Act of 1964, the
exercise
formsofpoliticalagencyand
tively
important
of
War on Poverty,
Johnson's
control.It hasdevelopednotableanalyses
ofindividual centerpiece Lyndon
lessons
in thisregard.TitleII of the
many
of governmentality
and furnishes
agencyin the deployment
actestablished
ActionPrograms
(CAPs),
Community
power(e.g.,Foucault1988, 1990; Irvine1995; Rose whichwere
to
take
a
state-of-the-art
designed
ap1990,259-72),but takenlittlenoticeof thecollective
to poverty.This approachdrewimportant
proach
action of social movementsor political groups.
connectionsbetweenpovertyand politics,ones in
(Appadurai2003, Chatterjee2004, and Cruikshank whichwelfare
as a wayofconstructpolicyfunctions
1999areimportant
thatI willdiscussbelow.)
exceptions
democratic
citizens.
It
shows
how a nominally
Thereis,in short,
a general
lackofattention
to democ- ing
economic
can
be used to reshapetheborders
policy
and a more
literature,
racyas suchin thegovernmental
of
inclusion
and
democratic
political
citizenship.
failure
to articulate
what,ifanything,
specific
mightbe
The
Action
inCommunity
Programs
integrated
distinctive
aboutit as a formofsubjectformation.
As a result,
theformidable
theoretical
resources
of sightsfromacademicsocial scienceand earlierFord
Foundationprograms,emphasizingthe "empowerthe governmental
paradigmhave notbeenemployed
ofbeneficiaries.
Thisis most
to examineour most centralcategoryof modern ment"and participation
articulated
in
section
202
which
(a),
laysdown
This has been a loss forour clearly
politicalorganization.
the
standard
that
programsshould be "developed,
ofbothdemocracy
andgovernmentality.
understanding
and
administered
withthemaximumfeaconducted,
It leads to a lopsidedemphasison the creationof
sible
of
residents
of
theareasandmembers
participation
thinkers
fromprocitizens,hindering
governmental
Act
accountof the waysthatcitizens ofthegroupsserved..." (EconomicOpportunity
vidinga synthetic
of
Title
section
202
This
standard
for
1964,
II,
(a)).
arenotonlytheproducts
ofpowerand circumstance,
and participation
was oriented
towards
empowerment
but also theircreators.
the
to
themselves,
We have,then,two opposingperspectives
simultaneously
with teaching poor help
them
to
tailor
more
allowing
programs
closelyto their
The
liberal-democratic
view
reciprocal
shortcomings.
own needs.As Attorney
GeneralRobertF. Kennedy
admirablythematizesthe democraticpotentialof
to
a
House
subcommittee:
explained
citizenship,
viewingit as a statusthatallowsautonomousindividuals
to exercisetheirpoliticalfreedom.
The institutions
whichaffectthe poor-education,
It is sensitive
to politicalinequalities
and the devellabor-arehuge,complex
welfare,
recreation,
business,
faroutsidetheircontrol.They
structures,
opmentof capacitiesneeded for citizensto act as
operating
forthepoor,notwiththem.Partofthe
autonomousequals. However,it is correspondingly planprograms
sense
of
and futility
comesfromthefeelhelplessness
inattentive
tothesensesinwhichdemocratic
citizenship
of powerlessness
to affect
theoperation
of these
ing
itselfis a historically
variablecategory
of
characteristic
The community
actionprograms
must
organizations.
forms
andpractice.
Incontrast,
the
particular
ofthought
these
into
basically
change organizations
bybuilding the
view sees citizenship
as a historically program
governmental
realrepresentation
forthepoor.Thisbillcalls
situated
setofideasandpractices
feasible
ofresidents."
thatarecharacteristic for,"maximum
This
participation
means
the
involvement
of
the
in
and
poor
planning
ofbroaderwaysofthinking.
Fromthisstarting
point,
them
a
real
in
voice
their
implementing
programs;
giving
it providesa nuancedaccountof theconstruction
of
institutions.
(U.S.HouseofRepresentatives
1964,305)
and agency.In so doing,however,
citizens'subjectivity
ithas failedto providean equallyinsightful
As Kennedy's
statement
feasible
analysisof
shows,"maximum
theircapacity
forcollective
embodiesthe mostnoblydemocratic
self-government.
participation"

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KEVIN OLSON

44

intentions,and indeed this seems to have been usedto createactive,politicized

subjects.In herview,
foremostfor many of the politicaland academic politicizedpoor peoplewereconstituted
as a group
activists
behindtheprogram.It encouragedthepoor by the War on Poverty."The poor" werebrought
to expresstheiropinionsand preferences
out of other,disparate,
by giving togetheras a collectivity
them"a real voice." In so doing,it also aimed to sometimes
conflicting
groupslikeurbansinglemoththeunemployed,
increaseparticipants'
unskilled
black
politicalagencyand legaleffi- ers,ruralcoalminers,
in
manand
so
in
a
broader
sense.
CAP
on.
were
attributed
a
of
set
Participation
They
cacy
migrants,
power-and were thenprovided
agementwas intendedto help such people develop interests-gaining
more
useful
in
with
and
economic
meanstodo so.According
skills
that
would
be
political
political
generally
one oftheforemost
otherpoliticaldomains(Marrisand Rein 1982,177; to Cruikshank,
innovations
ofthe
ActionPrograms
was creating
thispopQuadagno 1994,57-9). In thissense,theCAPs were Community
which
sites
for
incluulation
of
hadnot
as
institutional
(dis)empowered
poorpeople
promoting
designed
ofthe existedas suchbefore.
sionand politicalequality-goalscharacteristic
a pointof connectionbeI
outCruikshank
identifies
that
view
of
liberal
democracy
developmental
andwelfare
statecitizentweendemocratic
linedabove.
citizenship
ActionPrograms ship. The problemwith "the poor," in the social
Even thoughthe Community
lackofpower
ofthe1960s,isprimarily
a
liberal-democratic
analysis
conceptionof citi- scientific
exemplified
of
char- ratherthanlackofmoney.The academicexpertise
zenship,theyalso had a strongly
governmental
in a
causesofpoverty
acter.These programswere not simplyhigh-flying thistimelocatestheunderlying
thepolitical
powerof
agency.
Promoting
idealism-theywerealso shrewdpolitics.The Federal lackofpolitical
and the poor thus became the key focus of this new
promotedpoliticalactivity
programs
antipoverty
The roleofgovernment,
local
welfare
it
but
directed
for
the
correspondingly,
perspective.
against
poor,
power
and thepoliticalregimesthatoversaw shouldbe to identify
bureaucracies
"the poor" and promotethe
oftheirpoliticalcapabilities.
Herewe see
wereinstitution- development
ActionPrograms
them.Community
citizens-those
who
are"selfof
democratic
new
classes
Action
level
as
alizedon a local
Agencies
Community
to an extentbypoorpeople governing"-beingcreatedthroughwelfarepolicy.
(CAAs) thatwerestaffed
between
does not postulatea connection
themselves
(Naples1998).Theseagencieswerehead- Cruikshank
andwelfare
statecitizenship,
in theneighborhoods
then,so much
theyserved,typically democratic
quartered
of1960ssocialscience.
in "storefront
servicecenters."One oftheirforemost as uncoveritin theavant-garde
as a
wecanseetheWaronPoverty
was to provideassistance,
functions
advice,and legal Fromherperspective
social policy,
modernist
againststateand classicpiece of mid-century
backingto peoplefilingcomplaints
about
social
The emphasiswas typicallyon withitscharacteristic
local governments.
progress
optimism
scientific
that through
expertise.
forcingtheseagenciesto provideentitlements
Much more can be said about the Community
werealreadyon thebooks.
Cruikshank's
the
Action
Givengeneralunrestand insurgency
arguProgramsto substantiate
among
Robert
From
this
ment.
Administration
the
in
the
Kennedy'snoperspective,
early1960s, Johnson
poor
is
"a
real
voice"
notsimplya
had strongreasonsto deflecttheirenergiestowards tionofgivingthepoor
interests
and opinions.
local agencies (Fording2001). Againstthis back- meansofamplifying
pregiven
interests
and
it
constitutes
of
a
feat
were
the
CAPs
Rather,
opinionsto some
politicallegerdemain:
ground,
it constitutes
them.' Further,
of extentby articulating
theyhelped redirectthe politicaldissatisfaction
of
the
whichis to
the
these
entities
in
state,
most
some
of
their
language
pressing
poor people, satisfy
needs,developtheirparticipatory
capabilities,and sayin legallyactionabletermsthatcan be understood
A person'sopinionsandinterracismof bypoliticalinstitutions.
underminethepatronageand entrenched
as
such
ests
are
of
extant
the
allwithin boundaries
localgovernments,
onlywhentheyinterface
recognized
welfareentitlements.
ofstateaction,particwiththecategories
successfully
ofrights,
thepoliticalagencyof the ularlywithexisting
entitlements,
To buildand redirect
categories
is nota free
claims.
"Voice"
and
poor, the CAPs used techniquesthatcloselyfitthe identities, legitimate
BarbaraCruikshank
viewofcitizenship.
governmental
thatis thecase,"
thatmax- 'In thesensein which"theworldis everything
identifies
this
tendency,
arguing
insightfully
and thus
ofthought
the
articulates
i.e.,
very
possibilities
language
be
seen
as
an
elaborate
can
imumfeasible
participation
of
1922,a1). In some cases,thisfabrication
(Wittgenstein
being
to createand mobilizea newkindofpolitical interestswas
strategy
within
quite deliberate:"Cooptativeparticipation
its theanti-poverty
characterizes
can helpthepoordevelopa setofpolitical
effort
subject(1999,chap.3). Shesuccinctly
interests..."
Baratz,and Levi 1970,210).
(Bachrach,
is
in
which
state
a
"will
to
power
empower,"
impactas

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONSTRUCTING CITIZENS

45

agendas, but not provided.Theyput tools of law and legal

giftof agencyto peoplewithfree-standing
that
conditional
then,buta highly
gift imposespartic- expertisein the hands of people who previously
onitsownuse.Fromthisperspective, lacked such tools, touchingoff an explosion of
ularrequirements
ofpotential
claiming"thatwas a jointeffort
givingthepoor a realvoice can be seenas a process "welfare
otherwise
beneficiaries
and
aid
staff
and
and domesticating
ofreconstituting
Cloward
(Piven
unruly
legal
1971,287-310). Those resourcesallowedpeople to
subjects.
theliberal-democratic stakeclaimsforunenactedrightsand bringadminThis historydenaturalizes
bureaucracies
undergreatercitizencontrol.
idea ofpoliticalagencyto an extent.The CAPs drew istrative
wereelicitedfromthe
leftout of Whiletheseacts of litigation
disparategroupsofpeoplelargely
together
in
to
and
turned
some
reconstituted
them
into
a
them,
extent,theywere,in the
people question
politics,
politicalforce.Theirpoliticalagencywas end,actsoffreeagency.We mayquestiontheprocess
significant
traitso muchas a carefully throughwhichsuch people acquiredtheirsenseof
not an underdeveloped
This
and purpose,but theirfreedomin actingis
achievement.
storybeliestheidea that identity
produced
The picturewe areleftwith,then,is
citizens'democraticcapabilitiesexistin a universal uncontroversial.
but unequallydevelopedform.Rather,it suggests one in which people act freelywithina broader
werea pointof interface regimeof conditioning
thatthe CAPs themselves
and constraint.
betweenparticularconceptionsof "disempowered
theactionof "thepoor" did circleback
Further,
poor people," on one hand, and the creationof to affectthese sources of conditioningin some
suchcharacteristics,
on the importantways. By creatingactive citizens,the
politicalagentspossessing
other.Fromthispoint of view,the CAPs seem to CommunityAction Programsfosteredforms of
kindsof politicalsubjects subjectivity
have producedparticular
and agencythatfarexceededthebounds
accordingto a broadersetofideasaboutdemocratic of the regimethatcreatedthem.The verytermsof
werecontestedby the people subjected
citizenship.
government
Whilethisanalysisrevealsimportant
shortcom- to them.A prime exampleis "maximumfeasible
in
the
dominant
of
italso participation"
itself.In RobertKennedy'swords,this
conception citizenship,
ings
If
issues
in
its
wake.
leaves important
democratic standardgavethepoor a realvoice in theirinstitucitizensare governmentally
produced,is thereany- tions.Whatthatmeantin practicalterms,however,
limits,and forms
politics?Ifthe was notat allclear.Theboundaries,
thingleftto sayin favorofdemocratic
selfand its opinionsand interests
are a productof of participation
were subjectto protractedborder
broadersystemsof thoughtand practice,is there skirmishes
theprograms'duration.
throughout
about
the
A
notable
anything
normatively
compelling
expresexampleis Mobilizationfor Youth
sion or representation
of thoseopinionsand inter- (MFY), a NewYorkCityCommunity
ActionAgency.
ests?Can we attribute
to
the
MFY
was
known
for
anyspecialimportance
pushingparticipation
beyond
collectivepoliticalaction of democraticcitizensif thelimitsit was originally
intendedto serve(Naples
suchcitizens
ofgovernment? 1998,78-81). MembersofMFY usedit as a financial
alsoappeartobe products
The history
of theCommunity
ActionPrograms and organizational
base fortacklinga widevariety
of
into
this
Becauses.
It
a
of
Puerto
Ricanmothersin
providesimportantinsights
question.
helped group
sidespaintinga striking
ofthegovernmental theireffort
to removea hostileprincipalfroma local
portrait
construction
of politicalsubjects,it also tellsa story elementaryschool (Moynihan 1969, 114-15). It
in whichsubjectsstruggleforpoliticalcontroland supportedprotestsassociatedwiththe Civil Rights
contestthe verytermsof theirown subjectification Movement,a rentstrike,theVietnamWar,and the
and agency.Thisis a storyaboutthesensesin which 1963 Marchon Washington(Marrisand Rein 1982,
thepoliticalactivity
of suchcitizensgovernsgovern- 177; U. S. House of Representatives1967,947-49).2 It
ment.It providesus withthe conceptualbeginnings sponsoredvoterregistration
to
campaignsand efforts
of a wayto characterize
the complexplayof forces developa police department
civilianreviewboard.
thatoccurswhenpeople are encouragedto develop Thereis no moreeleganttestimonial
to theeffect
of
thanthe chargesof communismand
particularidentitiesat the same time that they theseactivities
acquirethemeansto modifytheveryforceseliciting social revolutionthat were leveled against MFY
fromthem.
activity
forYouthwas formedbeforethe Economic
Consider,for instance,changes in the legal 21Mobilization
Actof 1964.It servedas theoriginal
modelfor
Opportunity
of
"the
from
the
capability
poor" resulting
CAPs. maximum
feasible
andwassubsequently
participation
incorpoCommunityAction Agenciesprovidedmeans for ratedintotheprogram.
Someofitsactivities
thuspredate
the
benefits
thatwerelegallyguaranteed EOA.
claimingwelfare

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KEVIN OLSON

46

(Moynihan 1969, 102-27). A similarcomplement

arrivedin the formof FBI surveillance
aroundthe
sametime(Marrisand Rein 1982,179-81).
The politicizing
effects
oftheCommunity
Action
were
not
limited
to
however.
Intercities,
Programs
viewedabouttheprogramin hisarea,thisgas station
ownerfromruralWest Virginiaoffereda similar
assessment:
thatifa [strip-mine
comes
ButI havenoticed
operator]
be
in
a
to
better
him,
position fight
alongnow,they'll
and theydo so
thepeoplein the"actionprogram";
all
whentheymeetthatI thinkthey're
muchtalking
fortrouble,
forsomething
to go
up andlooking
primed
of
andwin,ifyouaskme.I admitwehaveplenty
fight
to fight
aboutdownhere,butit'snotso easyto
things
findwhotheenemyis. FromwhatI see,iftheycan't
finda mine-stripper,
theyturnon theschoolpeopleor
or on thefederal
who'spaying
themayor,
government
all
It
themin thefirst
to "organize"
place.
goesround
out.Nowthey're
androundfromwhatwe canfigure
on the statecapital,and
talkingabout marching
knowaboutconandletting
thecountry
Washington,
ditionsdownhere.So, you see, theydon'tjust sit
andgo outand
andtalk;theylookfortrouble
together
makeitwhentheycan'tfindit,andtheywon'tadjust
aroundhere,butthey
to therealsituation
themselves
haveto go findsomeoneto havea duelwith.(Coles
1969,123-24)
This interview
providesan importantwindow
seems
A generalpoliticization
intotheCAPs' effects.
resultin thiscommentator's
to havebeentheprimary
mind,thoughhe also admitsthat "the people in
the 'actionprogram'"have plentyof thingsto fight
are no longer
about. As a result,CAP participants
As
real
situation."
the
themselves
to
to
willing "adjust
refusal
to
thegovernmental
shows,
adjust
perspective
because
to therealsituationcan be quitesignificant,
oftengoes quite deep. We see
such self-adjustment
thatCAP participants
someofthisin theobservation
turn
on
the
to
are starting
people "who's payingto
place,"includinga march
'organize'themin thefirst
on the state capital and Washington.When the
ofthenewlypoliticizedreachesback
politicalactivity
to its source, thingsdo indeed go "round and
round,"as the gas stationownerput it. A cycleof
politicizationand politicalaction would then be
created,in whichthepoliticalagencyof CAP participantswould be able to influencethe verypolitical
sourcesof thatagency.
Thismovetowardsa nationalpoliticsofpoverty
nationalorganresultedin a freestanding,
eventually
ization.The NationalWelfareRightsOrganization
(NWRO) was foundedin 1967 as an independent,
Acextensionof the Community
nongovernmental
tionPrograms(Bailis1974;Pivenand Cloward1977,

chap. 5; West 1981). It was conceivedas a coordinatingbody for local activistsand welfarerights
organizations.This organizationgrew out of the
and limitations
of the CAPs, providing
experiences
a way to expandantipoverty
politicsto a national
level.LiketheCAPs,theNWRO was formedexplicitlyaroundtheidea thatthepoor shouldbe able to
participateto the maximumfeasibleextent(West
1981,20).
The NWRO redefined
thecollectivity
and interests of the poor to a degree,largelyin ways that
removedthemfromthe influences
further
of state
A
new
kind
of
collective
political
governmentality.
actorwas constituted
NWRO
by thisorganization.
a
memberswere requiredto be welfarerecipients,
later
to
"low-income
status"
requirement expanded
was
(West1981,40-41). As a result,theorganization
and
almost
controlled
entirely
bywomen,
populated
of whomwereblack.This definition
of
themajority
was
to
middlemembership adoptedlargely prevent
as theyhad in thecivil
classwhitesfromdominating
In thissense,theNWRO was even
rightsmovement.
controlled
moredirectly
byitsmembersin waysthat
of professional
social
wereeven more independent
workersand bureaucrats.
The NWRO continuedthe Community
Action
sue
of helpingwelfarerecipients
Programs'strategy
forbenefits
to whichthey
stateand local authorities
it operatedat a
were entitled.More importantly,
national level to lobby for and against federal
legislation(Nadasen2005, chap. 6). It also pursued
chosentestcasesto
of usingcarefully
a legalstrategy
welfare
of
the
(West 1981,
recipients
expand
rights
on
made
two
innovations
As
it
such,
287).
important
the CAPs. It broughtpoliticalactivity,including
morecompletely
"maximumfeasibleparticipation,"
underthecontrolofitssubjects.Atthesametime,it
to national
expandedthe scale of thisparticipation
politics.This had the importanteffectof allowing
to exertpoliticalpressuredirectly
welfarerecipients
on Washington,
givingthemmore directpolitical
influenceon the forcesof theirown subjectformacitizens.
tionas "poor people" and rights-bearing

"It All Goes Round and Round":

ReflexiveSelf-Government
The governmental
portraysgovernment
perspective
kindsofsubjects
as a processthatproducesparticular
This
own
active
self-modification.
their
through
is certainly
seen in the historyof the Community

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONSTRUCTING CITIZENS

47

to shapethe circumstances
fromwhichthoseinfluActionPrograms.While supportingthisanalysis,I
thusprovides
to developanotherkindofstory.In encesarise.Reflexive
havealso started
self-government
an
idealized
formula
for
are
thisrevision,not all formsof subjectformation
possiblefreemaximizing
equal. Some produce subjectswith capabilitiesto dom withinbroaderregimesof government.
ActionProgramsstandout as
The Community
theforcesto whichtheyare
restructure
and redirect
subject.Such subjectshave much greaterabilityto importantexamples of reflexiveself-government.
functioned
as a systemofgovernmenThe Theycertainly
controlthetermsoftheirownsubjectformation.
tal
action
fromtheirbeneficiaries.
how
we
can
tell
a
of
is
power eliciting
story
question,however,
subjectsbeing createdthrough(self-) government They went furtherthan that,however,producing
theverytermsof
whilesimultaneously
showinghow theycan acquire subjectswiththeabilityto challenge
Some of the instances
them.How theirown subjectification.
theabilityto governtheforcesgoverning
can we adequatelycharacterizethe complicityof examinedhere show people activelyalteringthe
as well governmental
regimeto whichtheywere subject.
subjectsin the processof subjectformation
underwhich The participantsin Mobilizationfor Youth, for
theconditions
as theirrolein modifying
theboundariesof
it occurs?
instance,expandedand redefined
a
their
own
theparticipatory
we
need
to
more
used
To do this,
develop
complex
participation.
They
of the kinds of eventsI have just agencygiventhemby theMFY programto leverage
understanding
involvementin other areas-school
narrated.As an exercisein theorybuilding,I will participatory
policereviewboards,and so on. Their
beginby focusingon the momentsin whichCAPs management,
succeededin promotingpoliticalagency-moments actionschallengedand rearticulated
the meaningof
whentheirparticipants
succeededto some extentin "maximumfeasibleparticipation"itself,showing
definedmaximumwas
goingbeyondtheboundsthathad beensetforthem that the bureaucratically
the veryprogramssustainingtheir capable of considerableenlargement.
to rearticulate
MFY particiwe
have
own agency.The question
to ask is,how do
pantsmovedtowardsa kindof reflexive
self-governthesemomentsin thehistoryof theCAPs challenge ment as they renegotiatedcontrolover the very
of the senses in programsthatconstituted
and expand our understanding
theirpoliticalagencyin
After
we finishthis thefirstplace.
whichcitizensare "constructed"?
I
will
return
to the more
theNationalWelfareRightsOrganizaoptimisticinvestigation,
Similarly,
in
which
cases
were
tion
rose
ActionPrograms
participants marginalized
up out oftheCommunity
typical
and frustrated
in theirattempts
to gainagency.This to become a nationalpoliticalforce.It began in a
otherhalfofthestoryteachessomeimportant
lessons federalprogramthat created subjectscapable of
aboutthewaysthatagencycan be foiledand denied. politicalaction againststateand local agencies.In
In an abstract
and the end, however,thesesame subjectstook action
sense,themomentsoffreedom
I
in
that
have
identified
the
CAPs
theultimate
structurself-government
againstthefederalgovernment,
occurredwhenpeoplewhereable to governsome of inginfluence
on theirsubjectformation.
The NWRO
the circumstances
in whichtheirown government was createdas an organization
withsufficient
power
occurred.Theyparticipated
in theformation
ofsuch and reachto influence
politicson thislargerstage.As
circledback to modifythe very
regimesbutwerestillsubjectto them.Becauseofthe such,it reflexively
feedback
in
this
its
loop
implicit
participatory
arrange- programscreating own conditionsofpossibility.
I
will
it
call reflexive
Here we can see the analyticalusefulnessof
ment,
self-government.
Reflexivity
describesthe sense in whichformsof government reflexivity
as a metricof self-government.
Reflexivity
allow people to set some of the termsof theirown is an elusiveideal.It givesus an index,however,for
Theiractionsand practicesreflect examiningthefine-grained
detailof thewaysactual
subjectformation.
backupon themselves:
current
politicalactsestablish regimesof citizenship
approachand departfromit.
the conditionsof possibilityfor subsequentones Neitheroftheexamplesjust discussedis a purecase
in this sense is of reflexiveself-government.
The participantsin
(Olson 2006, chap. 6). Reflexivity
always an incomplete,relativeform of freedom, MobilizationforYouthmanagedto breakthebounbecausepeopleare stillgovernedbywhatever
and startto redefine
the
regime dariesof subjectformation
in forming.
theyparticipate
Theymustbecomethe tasks and domains of citizenparticipation.They
kinds of subjectsallowedby the particularsocial, encountered
resistance
at manylevels,however:from
and
economic
environment
have
and
state
fromlocal newspapers
political,
they
city
government,
helpedcreate.Sucha regimecannotfreepeoplefrom with dire predictionsof "social revolution,"and
but it does givethemfreedom ultimately
influences,
fromthe sheer size and remotenessof
governing

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KEVIN OLSON

48

the federalbureaucracy
the Community theirlocal CAPs and foilthe politicalenergiesthat
controlling
ActionPrograms'funding(Marrisand Rein 1982, wereunleashedbythem.At thesametime,program
178-88;Moynihan1969,102-26). The MFY partic- organizersand theiracademicalliesoftenaimed at
oftheir a revolutionary
ratherthanevolutionary
ipantsdid notfullycontrolthecircumstances
conception
own subjectification.
established
some
of
social
Rather,they
change(Glazer1965,73, 79-80; Moynihan
thatwe can
formsof self-government
drives
1969,111-13). In addition,voterregistration
rudimentary
in
towards
the
CAPs
as
shifted
the
racial
reflexivity. organizedby
significantly
recognize retrospect tending
The NWRO is a similarcase. It providedpeople and class balance of urban electorates,
posing an
withgreatercontroloverthefederalprogramsshap- electoralthreatto some local politicians(Pivenand
ingtheirownagency.In thissense,it closedtheloop Cloward1971,166-67).The resultwas a hostileand
to a much greaterextentthanMobi- panickedreactionby manylocal elites.To counter
of reflexivity
lization for Youth. Nonetheless,this controlwas the perceivedthreat,theytriedto linkthe CAPs to
incompleteand hard-fought.
Congresswas the ulti- public fearsof politicalunrest,race rioting,social
and revolution
welfare
matearbiter
ofdecisionsaboutfederal
spend- instability,
(Moynihan1969,102-106;
of
House
but
not
U.S.
and
the
NWRO
could
1967, 944-5, 1000Representatives
lobbyCongress
ing,
controlit. The statethusmediatedthe self-govern- 1001). The resulting
politicaltensionscaused Conand prevented
theircom- gressto eliminatethe goal of "maximumfeasible
mentofwelfarerecipients
in 1967and turnprogramcontrolover
Further,the NWRO was itselfan participation"
plete reflexivity.
organizationwith a particularstructure.It was to the same local eliteswho had been targetsof
needs of acting federalintervention.
formedaccordingto the functional
a largepartof the CAPs'
Fromthisperspective,
on the nationalpoliticalstage.This meantbeinga
thatplacedparticular failurewas due to the programs'dependenceon
kindofbureaucracy
particular
thethreattheyposed to entrenched
withinit federalfunding,
kindsof demandson anyoneparticipating
(PivenandCloward1977,278-80;West1981,36-38). politicalpowers,and the chaotic and seemingly
Whilethe NWRO was a vehicleof self-governmentunlimitedwaythattheypursuedchangein unstable
In thesesenses,theCAPs failed
formanypoor people,it requiredthemto self-iden- socialcircumstances.
tifyas poor people in orderto act underits aegis. to create reflexivecitizens.Ratherthan produce
withinthepolitical
Further,it forcedthem to channeltheirpolitical citizenswho could act effectively
of the timeto gain controlof their
form.Thispro- circumstances
activities
intoa specific
organizational
racializedpolitown
forreflexive
videdgreateropportunities
agency,theycreatedradicalized,
self-governas
threats.
Such
who
constrained
ical
narrowed
and
same
time
but
at
the
ment,
peopledid
appeared
subjects
butinwaysthat
indeedacquiremorepoliticalagency,
them.
of CAP partic- promotedbacklashand undercuttheirown political
To some extent,the reflexivity
ipantswas also limitedby the formsof subjectifica- reflexivity.
tion and governmentaimed at by specificCAP
as
programs.Some CAPs wereused instrumentally
and
toolsofpoliticalpatronage,
co-opting frustrating
while
Citizenshipand Reflexivity
the politicalactivityof programparticipants
trueof
local elites.Thiswas notoriously
entrenching
where
were
used
to To seehowtheCAPsmighthavebetterpromotedthe
CAPs
Newarkand Chicago,
to
of theirparticipants,
it is instructive
controlmarginalized
peopleand securetheirpolitical reflexivity
the
relative
success
contrast
their
ultimate
failure
with
House
of
U.S.
48-59;
1994,
allegiance(Quadagno
1967,88-91). In suchcases,theidea ofsomerelatedexamples.TheCAPsoccupya governRepresentatives
of "maximumfeasibleparticipation"was cleverly mentalniche sharedby othergrassroots,
popularPorto
like
the
undermined
and managed,providingan appearance democratic,
organizations
participatory
of participationwhile maintainingelite political Alegre participatory
budgetingprocess (Baiocchi
was 2001), the Calcuttarailwaysquatterscolony(Chatcontrol(cf. Hyatt2001). Here governmentality
ratherthanenhanceit.
used to subvertreflexivity
terjee2004, chap. 3), and the Mumbai Allianceof
In othercases,theverysuccessofCAP programs slumdwellers'and poorwomen'sgroups(Appadurai
in securingleverageagainstlocal elitesseemsto have 2002). The MumbaiAlliance,forexample,engagesin
from
broughtabout theirdownfall.The problemin these whatArjunAppaduraicallsa "governmentality
and
of
self-modification
theflipside of caseslikeChicago below," using techniques
caseswas precisely
to mobilizethe poor (28). Unlike
and Newark:manylocal elitesfailedto domesticate groupformation

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONSTRUCTING CITIZENS

49

civic and voluntarygroups,

the CAPs, however,the Alliancecombinesdemo- economicinstitutions,
craticradicalismwitha cooperativepublic face.It interpersonal
relations,individualself-modification,
civicgroupaimedat and to a lesserextent,by thestate.
itselfas a nonpartisan
represents
Liberalregimesmightseem to promotea great
ofitsmembers.
In
theskillsand resources
developing
because of their
deal of reflexiveself-government
lines of a
this sense,it followsthe uncontroversial
and voluntary
The emphasison individualresponsibility
conceptionof liberaldemocracy.
developmental
This is trueonlyin the mostnarrow
radicalimpactof the Alliance,however,lies in as- participation.
Individualsdo indeed reflectback
however.
and
members'
politicalcapabilities subtly sense,
sertingits
whentheyactin a
of how pol- upon theirown subjectformation
the sharedunderstanding
renegotiating
manner.
iticsis conducted.It thuslegitimates
However, this
poor people's responsible,independent
is
elicited
the
absence
of
statesupport
activity
by
knowledgeby promotingtheirinnovativeideas on
how politicsshouldbe conducted.Here we can see and consequentexposureto economicrisk.People
to meetmarket
thattheAllianceis at oncemorepolitically
gradualist are forcedto act upon themselves
thatare largelyoutsideof theircontrol.
radicalthantheCAPs.It goes imperatives
and moreepistemically
when
the
a
is made necessary
not
the
CAPs
voice,
Similarly,
voluntary
activity
onlygiving poor
by
beyond
what theysay, avoidingpolitical the needs of individuals,schools,and communities
but legitimating
thereflexive
backlash,and thusenhancing
citizenship are not met by state funding(Hyatt 2001). In
in suchregimestend
associations
of itsmembers.
addition,voluntary
liketheAlliancepromptus to ask to be fairlynonpoliticalas a resultof theirown
Organizations
howreflexive
(Janoski1998,132-33).
self-government
mighthavebeenbetter dependenceon contributions
There
a
Action
Liberal
create
the
regimes
Programs.
only verylimitedsense of
Community
pursuedby
disanalo- reflexivity,
boundedby the
and institutional
are importantstructural
then,becauseit is tightly
of
the
India
versus
the
demands
market.
these
of
course:
between
cases,
gies
verThe regimes
thatEsping-Andersen
callsconservaUnitedStates,a nongovernmental
organization
I
tivetendtogovern
citizens
inwaysthatpromote
sus a stateagency.To avoid thesecomplications,
loyalty
similarto thoseof and tradition.
Theirfavored
modesofsubjectification
willlook forsourcesof reflexivity
the Alliance,but alreadypresentwithinthe institu- focusonmaintaining
statedominance
1971,
(Rimlinger
moraland religiousstandards
tionalframework
of the developedWesterndemoc- 87-130),inculcating
of
XIII
behavior
section
racies. Gosta Esping-Andersen
(Leo
[1891]1990,
32), enforcing
providesimportant
toolsforthisinvestigation
and/or
distinctions,
(1990, 1999). I willdraw traditional
gender
incorporating
intofamilies,
on his workto outlinewhatI willcall governmental individuals
and
religiousorganizations,
Each governmental
1990,58-61;
regimeis a specificcom- occupational
categories
regimes.
(Esping-Andersen
binationofinstitutions,
associations,
relations,
ideas, 1999,81-84).
Whilesuchregimespromoteself-government
and practicesthatcreatesspecificformsof subjectivin
ity. Such a regime might include governmental certainways,but theyare not ones thatcould be
civic called reflexive.
practicesofthestate,labormarkets,
employers,
Pope Leo XIII puts thispointwell
This
other
idea
allows
when
he
claims
that
is subjectto excessand is
and/or
people.
organizations,
liberty
us to comparethepotentialthatvariousinstitutional best limitedby authority.
He claimsnot to oppose
and socialcircumstances
haveforpromoting
reflexive libertybut to governit ([1888] 1990, section21).
Such a regimepromotescitizens'welfareby incorself-government.
The regime-type
thatEsping-Andersen
refersto poratingtheminto a hierarchical
social and moral
as liberal,forexample,can be viewedas a particular order.The statetendsto crowdoutmanyinstitutions
Liberalregimestendto minimize of civilsocietyand reduceothersto largelypassive
styleof governing.
the state'srolein goods and serviceprovisionwhile roles. As a resultof this emphasison hierarchy,
and loyalty,
suchcitizenstend
encouragingcitizensto be responsibleand self- tradition,
domesticity,
sufficient(Dean 1999, 149-75; Foucault 2004b, to havelow participation
ratesin voluntary
associa221-39; Lemke 2001, 199). In such regimes,self- tions (Janoski1998, 133-39). In a generalsense,
takestheformof individualentrepreneu- conservative
tracestwo intersecting
sufficiency
subjectification
axes:
individuals
are
differentiated
fromone another
rial activity,
volunteerism,
involvement,
community
and greaterrelianceon nonstateinstitutions,
as- by occupationand genderbut incorporatedinto
sociations,familiesand social networks(Esping- broadersystemsof social obligationthatemphasize
Andersen1999,36-46;Janoski1998,137-39).Liberal obedienceratherthan participation.
Reflexiveselfcitizensare thusgovernedby a characteristic
mixof government
is correspondingly
limited.

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KEVIN OLSON

50

Social democracycan also be seen fromnew withinstructural

conditions
ofpoverty
and economic
as
a
form
of
In
and
never
into
a
crossed
condition
that
angles
governmental
rationality.
uncertainty,
social-democratic
state
aims
to
shield
we
refer
to
as
economic
In
this
sense,
regimes,
policy
might
stability.
vulnerabilities
thatarisefrom the CAPs gave a voice to the poor withoutgiving
peoplefromexploitable
the labor market(Esping-Anderson
to speakfreely.
Herethey
1990, 44-47). themthematerialsecurity
This is typically
done by allocatingbenefitsas uni- exhibittraitsofliberalregimes,
and
promoting
liberty
As a result,suchregimescreate responsibility
versalcitizen'srights.
withintightmarketconstraints.
a spaceof economicfreedom
betweenstateand ecoFurtherimpedingreflexivity,
the CAPs also
characteristics
ofconservative
Their
nomy,subjectifying
people as citizenswho are rela- exhibited
regimes.
free
from
economic
These
citizens
are
on
in
necessity.
tively
heavyemphasis politicalpatronage Chicago
individualized
as equal bearersofrights,
butsimulta- and Newark,forinstance,showstypological
similareach used socialpolicy
neouslyincorporatedinto solidaristic,collectivist, itiesto Bismarck'sGermany:
and universalistic
social relations(Donzelot 1991; as a tool of statecontrol.Here reflexivity
is directly
Ewald 1986,349-76;Rose 1999,78-83).
subvertedto maintaincitizens'dependencyon the
in state.CAPs weredevelopedby theJohnsonAdmincitizenstendto participate
Social-democratic
associations
as frequently
as thoseofliberal istrationto underminesuch conservative
voluntary
patronage
undoneby it.
regimesand morethanthoseofconservative
regimes politics,but theywereultimately
howThis comparative
(Janoski1998,133-36). Unlikeliberalregimes,
analysisshowsthatthereflextend
to
ones
ever,social-democratic
providestate ivityof CAP participantswas underminedby a
for
This
ofliberaland conservative
associations.
createsa
combination
voluntary
support
regimecharwithinwhichsuchassoci- acteristics.
zone of economicsecurity
were
as dependParticipants
subjectified
ations are much more able to engagein political entbothon themarketandthestate,and thusdoubly
thisincludesactivity
criticalofthe removedfromreflexive
ThisanalyIronically,
self-government.
activity.
for
the
CAPs. If
stateitself(Janoski1998,132-33). Such associations sis also suggestsan alternative
path
I noted above in the theJohnsonAdministration
had been less clever-if
resemblethe characteristics
are
able
it
had
less
of
a
"feat
of politicallegerdeNationalWelfareRightsOrganization.
They
attempted
to engagein politicalactivitythat circlesback, in main"-these programsmay have been more sucused minimalfederal
importantways, to affecttheir own sources of cessful.The Administration
in
the
form
of
In
such
state
associational
and
cases,
supportand
government resources,
funding agency.
createstheconditionsforformsofcollective
political legal aid, to extractmaximalbenefitsfromlocal
CAP participants
as
actionthatare,to some extent,reflexive.
subjectified
agencies.It thereby
and
to
local
of
can
combine
this
We
politicallyopposed
comparison regime-types entitled,wronged,
a radical,
elites.They were,fromthis perspective,
withthelessonslearnedfromtheCAPs to describea
rather
than
democratic
the
ideal
of
that
more
disruptive,
insurgent
group,
closelyapproximates
regime
into the politicalfabricof
reflexivity.
Regimesprovidingsubstantialeconomic citizensfullyintegrated
in the Mumbai
createsubjectswho are less con- theirlocalitieslike the participants
and social security
was
Whenthisis done in Alliance.Whilethisfocuson politicalinsurgency
strainedbymarketimperatives.
universalistic
a relatively
unconditional,
manner,it innovativeand successfulto some extent(Fording
backlash.
createdsubstantial
and collective 2001), it ultimately
seemsto promoteassociational
activity
if the federal
Thingsmay have been different
politicalaction. In this case, people have greater
on
had not focused
local
to choosetheconditionsof theirown government
challenging
opportunities
becomesmore elitesand had insteadprovideddirectmaterialsupand self-government
subjectification,
form(cf.Glazer1965).
nearly reflexive.In contrast,regimesthat leave portin a moreuniversalistic
wouldhaveinsulated
citizenssubjectto economicriskdepoliticizethem. Sucha formofgovernmentality
Similarly,
regimesthatconditionbenefitson moral citizensfromeconomicneed, cuttingsome of the
forceover them.At the same
social structures,
or loyaltyto market'sdisciplinary
agendas,hierarchical
citizensand reduce time,it would have renderedmuchlocal patronage
thestatealso tendto depoliticize
irrelevant.
It would have createda newlyindependtheirreflexivity.
active class of citizensout of
some
This comparativeinvestigation
ent,
provides
associationally
of CAP participants
was previouscategoriesof people dependenton locally
clues why the reflexivity
Ratherthan forcibly
entitlements.
insufficient
to pro- administered
blocked,occluded,and ultimately
opoccurred posing local patronagesystemsby focusingthe
tecttheirprograms.
Theirpoliticalactivity
underconstanteconomicduress.It was conducted politicalenergyof CAP participants
againstthem,

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONSTRUCTING CITIZENS

51

createsspacesof freedomand enhancesagencyin a

potentially
way (cf.Olson 2007).
self-reinforcing
in
such
a
Citizenship
regimewould be a status
processes.
legallyopento changethroughdemocratic
Citizenswouldrequiretheabilityto reformulate
the
to
themselves
as
and
accorded
rights
privileges
citizens.Further,
theywould need particularkinds
of participatory
of a critical
capabilities,
presumably
and discursive
and
the
to
sort,
power shapethem(cf.
Verba, Schlozman,and Brady1995, chap. 11-12).
would need to do so as
Finally,thoseparticipating
others.
equals,to prevent
anyfromundulygoverning
The morethesegeneralconditionsaremet,themore
(Olson 2006, chap. 6). Such
citizenshipis reflexive
citizenswould be more able to alterthe rangeof
practicesand life possibilitiestheythemselvesare
allowed.Theywould be moreable to participate
in
the
of
circumstances
their
own
Regimesof Freedom
choosing
self-governmentand freedom.
I began this essay by identifying
two contrasting
The idea of reflexivity
providesan organizing
of
The
liberal-democratic
view
for
rubric
This is
conceptions citizenship.
comparingregimesof citizenship.
sees citizenshipas a politicaland legal statusthat the sense in whichit sheds the most lighton the
is embodiedto a greateror lesserextentby various CommunityAction Programs.The historyof the
canariseinspecific
circumpeople.Citizens'equalityand politicalagencyis often CAPsshowshowfreedom
seenas a fundamental
but stancesand also how it can be thwarted,
foreclosed,
goal ofliberaldemocracy,
no attention
is paid to theshifting,
contestedmean- and constrained.
This historyillustrates
some of the
or to its embeddedness
in broader waysthatcitizenship
canproducethesocial,political,
ingof citizenship
aboutpoliticsand society.Govern- and materialconditionsforfreedom,
but also shows
waysof thinking
mentalaccounts,in contrast,
tools
how
entrenched
structures
of
providepowerful
governmental
power
forunderstanding
thefabrication
of typesof people can foilreflexive
self-government.
drawoutthesensesinwhich
as citizens.
The centralinsightof the reflexive
view is that
Theyusefully
a
is
of
an
individual's
are
constructed
as
citizens
the
at
sametime
citizenship complexproduct
subjects
creativeadaptationto broaderformsofthoughtand thattheycreateand remodelthatstatusitself.
Likethe
this
has
to
account
of
citizens
rebuild
their
own
as
However,
Theseus,
practice.
approach yet
Ship
identity
forsomething
likecollective
self-determinawhile
within
it.
The idea of
political
politicalsubjects
living
tionwithina governmental
framework.
reflexive
is designedto acknowledge
that
citizenship
Oncewe havedenaturalized
on it.Whenwe
citizenship
byasking factandprovidemeansforcapitalizing
howcitizensareconstructed,
thequestionremainsof understand
as a doublestatus-bothcrecitizenship
the extentto which politicaland epistemicself- ated and creative-we realizethat it can only be
is stillpossible.The idea of reflexivity adequatelydescribedby unitingthesetwomoments.
government
an
abstractschema for answeringthis The productionof politicallyable citizens,when
provides
question.It builds on importantinsightsin both properlyaccomplished,can providethe means for
liberal democracyand governmentality.
Like the theirpoliticaland epistemic
freedom.
In a pragmatic,
liberal-democratic
the
reflexive
one
view,
tobecome
placesgreat nonutopiansense,itallowspeoplefreedom
self-determination.
Like thekindsofpeopletheywantto be.
weighton citizens'collective
the governmental
view, it acknowledgesthe conThe storyI have begun tellinghere is one of
struction
ofbothcitizensand ideasaboutcitizenship. creativeagencywithinconstraint.
To tellthatstory
thesetwo insights,
it describesa conception carefully,
we musttraceout the specific,qualitative
Joining
of citizenship
in whichtheveryprocessof subjecti- ways that people's self-government
is modified,
ficationgives citizensthe abilityto modifythat blocked,and shaped by circumstance
and outside
process.This conceptioncreatescitizenswho are forces.The idea of reflexivity
providesanalytical
theirownstatusand identity. means to make such a description.It revealshow
capableofdetermining
It is a specificway of governing
citizens,one that politicalagencycan be simultaneously
given and

would have simply

this formof governmentality
As such,it
renderedthoseparticipants
independent.
would have constituteda much less obvious and
explosivethreatto existingformsof conservative
The threatwould have been just
governmentality.
as realin theend,but muchlessvisible.The depenand
dence of poor people on local governments
economicmarketswould be replacedby federally
Such materially
and assosupportedindependence.
much
then
be
freerto
free
citizens
would
ciationally
A
in
local
(and national)politics. governparticipate
mentalregimeofthiskindwouldmorecloselymimic
ofthesocial-democratic
thebestfeatures
regimetype
and the Mumbai Alliance,providingmuch better
of itscitizens.
supportforthereflexivity

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KEVIN OLSON

52

takenaway,how groupsof people can be set up as

subjectsof governmentand agentsof theirown
at thesametime.Byfocusing
on thecomplex
destiny
constructionof active political subjects within
our understanding
broaderregimesof government,
becomescorrespondingly
moresubtle.
of citizenship
Thisanalysisinvitesus to recognizethecomplexities
of moderncitizenship
and see politicalagencyas a
thatis potentially
liberating.
fragileachievement

Acknowledgments

EconomicOpportunity
Actof 1964.P.L. 88-452.
Gosta. 1990. The ThreeWorldsof Welfare
Esping-Andersen,
PrincetonUniversity
Press.
Capitalism.Princeton:
Esping-Andersen,
ofPostindusGosta. 1999. SocialFoundations
Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press.
trialEconomies.
1986.L'EtatProvidence.
Paris:BarnardGrasset.
twald,
Franfois.
Eze, Emmanuel.1995."The Colorof Reason:The Idea of 'Race'
in Kant'sAnthropology."
In Anthropology
and the German
on Humanity,
ed. Katherine
Faull.
Enlightenment:
Perspectives
PA:
Bucknell
200-41.
Press,
Lewisburg,
University
Fording,Richard.2001. "The PoliticalResponseto BlackInsurgency:A CriticalTest of CompetingTheoriesof the State."
American
PoliticalScienceReview95 (1): 115-30.
Foucault,Michel.1988.CareoftheSelf TheHistory
ofSexuality,
vol.3. New York:VintageBooks.

I'm grateful
to SusanCoutin,Mika LaVaque-Manty, Foucault,Michel. 1990. The Use of Pleasure:The Historyof
vol.2. New York:VintageBooks.
Sexuality,
fortheircarefulcomand theanonymousreviewers
Michel.
2004a.Securite,
Coursau
Territoire,
Foucault,
Population:
mentson thisessay.Specialthanksalso to Matthew
Collegede France,1977-1978.Paris:Gallimard.
on thelegislative
Beckmannforsharinghis expertise
Coursau
Foucault,Michel.2004b.Naissancede la Biopolitique:
archives.
Collegede France,1978-1979.Paris:Gallimard.
10 April2006
submitted
Manuscript
8 March2007
forpublication
Manuscript
accepted

References
Appadurai,Arjun.2002. "Deep Democracy:UrbanGovernmenandtheHorizonofPolitics."PublicCulture14 (1): 21-47.
tality
Ethics.Trans.RogerCrisp.Cam2000. Nicomachean
Aristotle.
Press.
bridge:CambridgeUniversity
Bachrach,Peter,MortonBaratz,and MargaretLevi. 1970."The
In Appendixto
ofCitizenParticipation."
PoliticalSignificance
PeterBachrachand MortonBaratz,Powerand Poverty:
Theory
NewYork,OxfordUniversity
and Practice.
Press,201-13.
Grassroots
Bailis,LawrenceNeil. 1974.BreadorJustice:
Organizing
MA: D. C. Heath.
Movement.
in theWelfare
Lexington,
Rights
and Politics:
Activism,
Baiocchi,Gianpaolo.2001."Participation,
and DeliberativeDemocratic
The Porto AlegreExperiment
Theory."Politicsand Society29 (1): 43-72.
Partha.2004. ThePoliticsoftheGoverned:
Reflections
Chatterjee,
on PopularPoliticsinMostoftheWorld.NewYork:Columbia
Press.
University
and AcRobert.
1969. "Rural Upheaval:Confrontation
Coles,
commodation."In On FightingPoverty:Perspectives
from
ed. JamesSundquist.New York: Basic Books,
Experience,
103-26.
Barbara.1999. The Will to Empower:Democratic
Cruikshank,
Press.
Citizensand OtherSubjects.Ithaca:CornellUniversity
PowerandRuleinModern
Dean,Mitchell.1999.Governmentality:
ThousandOaks,CA: Sage.
Society.
and AuthoritarianDean, Mitchell.2002. "LiberalGovernment
and Society31 (1): 37-61.
ism."Economy
du Social:Essaisurle Declin
Donzelot,Jacques.1984.L'Invention
Paris:Fayard.
desPassionsPolitiques.
Donzelot,Jacques.1991."The Mobilizationof Society."In The
ed. Graham
Foucault Effect:Studies in Governmentality,
ColinGordon,and PeterMiller.Chicago:University
Burchell,
of ChicagoPress,169-79.

Glazer,Nathan.1965."Paradoxesof AmericanPoverty."Public
1: 71-81.
Interest
1992."Individuation
Habermas,Jiirgen.
throughSocialization."
Trans.WilliamMark HohenIn Postmetaphysical
Thinking.
garten.Cambridge:MIT Press,149-204.
1996.Between
Factsand Norms:Contributions
Habermas,Jiurgen.
Trans.William
to a DiscourseTheory
ofLaw and Democracy.
MIT
Press.
Rehg.Cambridge:
and
Hindess,Barry.1991."TakingSocialismSeriously."
Economy
20
363-79.
(4):
Society
Hindess,Barry.1997."Politicsand Governmentality."
Economy
and Society26 (2): 257-72.
Hobhouse,L. T. [1911] 1994.Liberalism.
Cambridge
Cambridge:
Press.
University
Humboldt,Wilhelmvon. [1854] 1969.TheLimitsofStateAction.
Press.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Neoliberal
Citizen
to Volunteer:
Brin.
2001.
"From
Susan
Hyatt,
In TheNewPoverty
and theErasureofPoverty."
Governance
NewYork:New
Goodeand Jeff
ed. Judith
Studies,
Maskovsky.
YorkUniversity
Press,201-35.
Irvine,Janice.1995. "RegulatedPassions: The Inventionof
InhibitedSexual Desire and Sexual Addiction."In Deviant
Urla. Indianapolis:
Bodies,ed. Jennifer
Terryand Jacqueline
IndianaUniversity
Press,314-37.
and CivilSociety.
Thomas.1998.Citizenship
Janoski,
Cambridge:
Press.
CambridgeUniversity
on theFeelingofthe
Kant,Immanuel.[1763] 2003. Observations
Beautifuland Sublime.Trans. JohnGoldthwait.Berkeley:
of CaliforniaPress.
University
Kant,Immanuel.[1785] 1996.Groundwork
of
oftheMetaphysics
Morals.In PracticalPhilosophy.
Trans.Mary Gregor.CamPress,37-108.
bridge:CambridgeUniversity
Kant, Immanuel.[1797] 1996. Metaphysics
of Morals. Trans.
Press.
MaryGregor.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Kant,Immanuel.[1800] 1974. Anthropology
froma Pragmatic
Point of View. 2nd ed. Trans. Mary Gregor.The Hague:
MartinusNijhoff.
Kymlicka,Will. 1995. MulticulturalCitizenship:A Liberal
Theoryof MinorityRights. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONSTRUCTING CITIZENS

53

Lemke,Thomas. 2001. "'The Birth of Bio-Politics':Michel

Foucault'sLectureat the Collage de Franceon Neo-Liberal
and Society30 (2): 190-207.
Economy
Governmentality."
and CriLemke,Thomas. 2002. "Foucault,Governmentality,
Marxism14 (3): 49-64.
tique."Rethinking
ed.
Leo XIII. [1888] 1990. "Libertas."In ThePapal Encyclicals,
Claudia Carlen.Vol. 2. AnnArbor:PierianPress,169-81.
Leo XIII. [1891] 1990. "Rerum Novarum." In The Papal
ed. Claudia Carlen.Vol. 2. Ann Arbor:Pierian
Encyclicals,
Press,241-61.
In Two
Locke,John.[1690] 1988.SecondTreatiseofGovernment.
ed. PeterLaslett.Cambridge:CamTreatisesof Government,
Press,265-428.
bridgeUniversity

and Power,ed. JanPieterseand Bhikhu

Culture,Knowledge,
Parkekh.London:Zed Books,81-98.
the
Piven,FrancesFox, and RichardCloward.1971.Regulating
Poor: The Functionsof Public Welfare.New York: Vintage
Books.
Piven,FrancesFox, and RichardCloward.1977. Poor People's
Movements:
WhyTheySucceed,How TheyFail. New York:
PantheonBooks.
How RacismUnderQuadagno,Jill.1994. The Colorof Welfare:
minedthe War on Poverty.
New York: OxfordUniversity
Press.
Rawls,John.1996. PoliticalLiberalism.New York: Columbia
Press.
University

In The
Locke,John.[1692] 1963.A ThirdLetter
forToleration.
Gaston.1971. Welfare
in
Rimlinger,
Policyand Industrialization
Works
ofjohnLocke,vol.6. Londoneditionof1823.Reprinted
andRussia.NewYork:JohnWileyand Sons.
America,
Europe,
in Darmstadt:ScientiaVerlagAalen,139-546.
Nikolas. 1990. Governing
the Soul: The Shapingof the
Human Under- Rose,
Locke,John.[1700] 1975.An EssayConcerning
PrivateSelf.New York:Routledge.
4thed. Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press.
standing.
Nikolas. 1999. Powersof Freedom:Reframing
Political
A Studyin MoralTheory. Rose,
Alasdair.1981.AfterVirtue:
MacIntyre,
New
York:
Press.
Thought.
CambridgeUniversity
London:Duckworth.
and
Peter
Miller.1992."PoliticalPowerbeyond
Rose,
Nikolas,
Marris,Peter,and MartinRein.1982.DilemmasofSocialReform:
the State:Problematicsof Government."
BritishJournalof
and
Action
in
the
United
2nd
ed.
States,
Poverty Community
43
173-205.
(2):
Sociology
of ChicagoPress.
Chicago:University
1762. Imile. Trans. Barbara Foxley.
Rousseau,Jean-Jacques.
Marshall,T.H. [1949] 1963. "Citizenshipand Social Class." In
London:
1993.
Everyman,
at theCrossroads.
London:Heinemann,67-127.
Sociology
1964. Economic Opportunity
Mead, GeorgeHerbert.1934. Mind,Self,and Society.Chicago: U.S. House of Representatives.
Act of 1964.HearingsbeforetheSubcommittee
on theWar
of ChicagoPress.
University
on
of
the
on
Committee
Education
and
PovertyProgram
Mill,JohnStuart.[1846-47] 1963. Essaysvariouslytitled"The
88th
2nd
on
Labor,
Session,
H.R.
10440,
Congress,
Conditionof Ireland."In CollectedWorks,
vol. 24, ed. Ann
17 March 1964 (Washington:U.S. GovernmentPrinting
Robson and JohnRobson.Toronto:University
of Toronto
Office,
1964).
Press, 879-82, 913-16, 923-26, 930-32, 942-45, 991-93,
1004-1008.
U.S. House of Representatives.
1967.EconomicOpportunity
Act
Amendments
of 1967. Hearingsbeforethe Committeeon
Mill, JohnStuart. [1850] 1984. "The Negro Question." In
Educationand Labor, 90th Congress,1stSession,on H.R.
CollectedWorks,
vol. 21, ed. Ann Robsonand JohnRobson.
U.S. Government
Toronto:University
of TorontoPress,85-95.
8311, 12 and 16 June1967 (Washington:
Office,
1967).
Printing
Stuart.
1989.
On
ed.
Stefan
Collini.
Mill, John
[1859]
Liberty,
Press.
Valverde,Mariana. 1991. The Age of Light,Soap, and Water:
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Moral Reformin English Canada, 1885-1925. Toronto:
Charles.
1997.
The
Racial
Contract.
Ithaca:
Cornell
UniMills,
McClellandand Stewart.
Press.
versity
Moynihan,Daniel Patrick.1969. MaximumFeasibleMisunder- Valverde,Mariana. 1996. "'Despotism' and Ethical Liberal
Governance."
and Society
25 (3): 357-72.
Actionin theWaronPoverty.
NewYork:
Economy
standing:
Community
FreePress.
and HenryBrady.1995.Voiceand
Verba,Sidney,KaySchlozman,
in AmericanPolitics.Cambridge:
The WelfareRights
Nadasen,Premilla.2005. WelfareWarriors:
Equality:CivicVoluntarism
HarvardUniversity
in theUnitedStates.New York:Routledge.
Press.
Movement
Warriors:
ActivistMothering, Walters,William. 1994. "The Discoveryof 'Unemployment':
Naples, Nancy. 1998. Grassroots
and
the
War
on
New Formsforthe Government
of Poverty."Economyand
Work,
Community
Poverty.New York:
Routledge.
Society23 (3): 265-90.
O'Malley,Pat. 2000. "UncertainSubjects:Risks,Liberalismand
The
West,Guida. 1981. TheNationalWelfare
RightsMovement:
Contract."Economy
and Society29 (4): 460-84.
SocialProtest
ofPoorWomen.New York:Praeger.
O'Malley,Pat, LornaWeir,and Clifford
Shearing.1997. "GovWittgenstein,Ludwig. 1922. TractatusLogico-Philosophicus.
Politics."Economy
and Society
26 (4):
Criticism,
ernmentality,
Trans.C. K. Ogden.New York:Routledge.
501-17.
Wollstonecraft,
Mary. 1792. A Vindicationof the Rightsof
PoliticalEqualityand
Olson, Kevin.2006. Reflexive
Democracy:
Woman,2nd ed. New York:Norton,1988.
theWelfare
State.Cambridge:MIT Press.
Olson, Kevin.2007. "Paradoxesof Constitutional
Democracy."
American
Journal
ofPoliticalScience51 (2): 330-43.
Social Theory
Osborne,Thomas.1998.AspectsofEnlightenment:
and theEthicsofTruth.London:UCL Press.
Parekh,Bhikhu.1995."Liberalismand Colonialism:A Critique
of Locke and Mill. In TheDecolonization
oftheImagination:

Kevin Olson is assistantprofessorof political

of California,
science,University
Irvine,Irvine,CA
92697.

This content downloaded from 99.226.144.15 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:30:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions